Scientists say Turin Shroud is Supernatural !!!

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
This is sort of off topic but it reminds me of Steven Hawking saying that if aliens came to earth they would likely want to attack it and harvest the
earth for resources, or whatever. Yet, Mr. Hawking has no place to speaking about an alien's psychology. In fact, I would argue that Mr. Hawking
likely isn't too adept at human psychology by saying that because the closest thing he'd have to understanding alien psychology would be human
psychology.

I don't think you quite got the message. It was not about how the aliens are definitely going to be bloodthirsty maniacs. It's about the downside
risk, in case they actually are. Let's say there is 85% chance that aliens are rich and benevolent hippies who cruise the Universe to cure cancer and
give away cases of champagne. The remaining 15% is the chance that they will be like hi-tech Texas Chainsaw Massacre type of guys. The idea is that
enormous benefits of the 85% do not outweigh certain extinction of human species in the other 15%.

So if Dr. Hawking is not an expert in alien psyche, he says that whatever the percentage is, it's too damn risky to consider this. It's like playing
russian roulette for $1M. A lot of people would do it, but the conservative and prudent type won't.

Okay, so now we're going to get into an argument about this? First off, your percentages are incredibly incorrect. Not only is not 85/15, there are
not only those two possibilities. I know tons of people who are neither hippies nor "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" type guys. In fact, I'd say the majority
of people are neither hippies nor texas chainsaw massacre type guys. But lets examine the latter:

If the Aliens were in fact Texas Chainsaw Massacre type aliens, how would they have ever evolved to the point of making it outerspace, let alone
interstellar travel? It seems to me that people who are just out for blood tend to contribute nothing to the scientific community. Even further, if
they are out for blood only, then they'd be stuck on their planet trying to murder the rest of their species. Their first instinct wouldn't be, "Hey,
you know what, I want blood, but lets work together in order to learn physics, build space ships, find life on another planet, and kill it. I can wait
that long before I satisfy this primal urge for killing that I'm having." This is ludicrous.

The fact of the matter is that it would take a great amount of work to get to a point where a race could accomplish interstellar travel. So, this
eliminates the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" type aliens because they wouldn't be able to progress beyond their primal urges to kill each other. It would
also take a great amount of intellect to be able to achieve such a thing. I would argue that as intellect goes up there is also a reverse correlation
to "blood thirst." I would also argue that even beginning to think about interstellar travel would require a large amount of curiousity, let alone
accomplishing such a thing. As a result, this curiosity and intellect would likely mean that aliens capable of coming to Earth would be curious, and
thus observational, about humankind, and unlikely to attack us. And if the aliens did need resources, I would think they'd be smart enough (as they
are smart enough to accomplish interstellar travel) to get the attention of the world leaders and either barter with them or try to threaten them with
war before they went into battle and probably lost some of their alien brothers in a war.

But even that is unrealistic, as it is unlikely that something smart enough to accomplish interstellar travel would be so dumb as to not have a
solution for their problems at home. Even humans today are coming up with solutions to combat the environmental issues (and other issues) we are
facing, and we are no where near successful interstellar travel. I can't imagine humans being stagnant in their technological growth in those areas,
but booming in interstellar travel. Similarly, it doesn't make sense for aliens to encounter that problem either. Thus, that option is rather
unlikely.

All in all, I'd say its incredibly unlikely that an alien race would come to earth to kill humans or pillage the earth's natural resources, because it
would require an incredible amount of intellect and curiousity to accomplish such a feat. Thus, I'd put the 15% odds at 0.000000000000000000001

If you ask me, I'd say if humans found life on another planet, and had the means to get there, we'd study the aliens, not attack and kill
them.

Human history is abundant with examples of opposite sort of behavior.

So your opinion here is that if humans found life on another planet, we'd try to kill it? So, let's get this straight, we'd spend billions of dollars
to have our scientists go up in space ships, just to kill off life? I think you should clarify instead of responding with one sentence.

The point of my original post was because the other person was dismissive of the shroud based on the original carbon dating test that they did.
However, there have been, as you point out, enough questions to call the original testing into doubt. Just as this study has too many questions
surrounding it to say that its valid.

Yes, but at least the study demonstrated a non-zero probability that the shroud is modern. That whole "mending" of the shroud is actually a hypothesis
in and by itself.

I probably should have left this part alone because it didn't fit in my post above, but oh well, sorry for the waste of space. However, I am confused
as to your point here. Are you saying that the shroud is modern and not from the middle ages or the first century a.d.? Also, I agree that the mending
of the shroud is just a hypothesis. However, most things are. It should be noted that a study in the peer reviewed scientific journal of Thermochimica
Acta "proved" that the carbon dating was invalid because the sample used was invalid. So, I think we should distinguish the words hypothesis and
speculation in this case because it's more likely that the sample used was in fact invalid, than it is not. The mending is not just speculation, but
rather an educated hypothesis on the subject.

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
Okay, so now we're going to get into an argument about this? First off, your percentages are incredibly incorrect. Not only is not 85/15, there are
not only those two possibilities. I know tons of people who are neither hippies nor "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" type guys. In fact, I'd say the
majority of people are neither hippies nor Texas chainsaw massacre type guys.

Well I obviously simplified just to make a shorter argument.

If the Aliens were in fact Texas Chainsaw Massacre type aliens, how would they have ever evolved to the point of making it outerspace, let
alone interstellar travel? It seems to me that people who are just out for blood tend to contribute nothing to the scientific community.

OK, lets examine history again. Nazi Germany had some of the best science on the planet. They wrecked havoc on much of Europe and sank ships in clear
view of New Jersey, right here in the States, and invented superguns and ballistic missiles.

I admit my analogy with Texas etc was poorly chosen. Motivations of other races are unlikely be confined to some murderous pathology. I just wanted to
underscore the dramatic, and indeed tragic, possibilities.

So your opinion here is that if humans found life on another planet, we'd try to kill it? So, let's get this straight, we'd spend billions
of dollars to have our scientists go up in space ships, just to kill off life?

I do think that's possibility, however it won't necessarily materialize. It's been explored in sci-fi novels -- first contact, somebody with an
itchy trigger finger, then perception of an aggression etc.

The Shroud Of Turin Is Indeed
Authentic

I am in solid agreement with the truth, that the Shroud Of Turin does in fact support the resurrection of Christ. No other two dimensional picture,
painting, or image, of any kind, can do what this shroud does. Not only is there a remarkable image of this Man, both front, and back of Him,
imprinted in the nylon of the shroud, but in fact, also is engraved, a three dimensional blue print, of the Man who was wrapped inside. In the above
documentary, it explains more than i could in this message, but this documentary by the History Channel, is by far, not the most revealing documentary
of evidence for this subject known to date. Since this documentary was made, not only were they able to bring the full body of Christ back to life,
researchers have also discovered something remarkable. Now bare with me, but the image of flowers. Not just any flowers though. Of course not. God
knows what He is doing. The images of the different kinds of flowers they found in the shroud are in fact unique only to Jerusalem. Also, as some
older post may have pointed out, the image made on the shroud could not be duplicated, even to this day, given all the technology we now contain. Like
our friend whom created this post reveals, the image had to have been made in the supernatural resurrection of the body of Christ, from light
radiating from the flesh itself. Not in a way of a laser, or a light bulb, but in the way of radiation. With much evidence supporting the authenticity
of the shroud, only one scientific test claims different, and that is the infamous Carbon 14 Dating, which was done in the not to recent past. What is
now understood, is that in the bottom corner of the shroud, where the sample was taken from, this corner had been handled numerous times in the
thirteen, to fourteen hundreds when being displayed, thus greatly effecting the results of the Carbon 14 Dating. There are multiple paintings proving
that the corner of the shroud, where the sample was taken from, was indeed handled numerous times, during these medieval times. The Shroud of Turin is
authentic, does prove the resurrection of Christ Jesus, and possibly contains more information in those nylon fibers than anyone could have ever
anticipated.

Lol bud nylon was invented in the 1930's.... also the only way to prove the turin shroud was indeed produced as you say, than the only way to prove
it would be to witness it. Did jesus exist? probably. He was probably a pretty wise man and a most excellent magician.

Thanks for pointing that out man. I haven't slept in forty eight hours. LINEN. My bad. Slip of the keyboard. I appreciate you being cool about that,
pointing it out. Other than that mistake of the fabric. I guarantee the rest is legitimate. Dang. What can i say. No ones perfect. Linen. I don't
know what i was thinking. Again, thanks for not being a dick about it man. That was cool of you.

I don't know about others but I wouldnt have read this or about this by searching
for old articles. However I might read those to if I'm very interested. I read a lot in passing or
as if it's a daily newspaper.

I am no apologist for the Catholic church whom I think of as the leading scandalous organization ever to exist. However, let me try to understand your
statement correctly.
So being Catholic makes them any more biased than being athiest? Wouldn't a secular scientist in these modern times be more inclined to try to
DISprove the shroud just as a Catholic scientist would be inclined to PROVE the shroud to be legit?

You're biased already. You show your cards in your initial complaint of the scientists you question.
What a first grader mentality that type of accusation exposes. If you want to contribute meaningfully, try thinking twice about what it is that you
are posting. Posts like yours bring down the overall intelligence of the forum.

Its fake. Its a hoax. Prove its real. Provide a link to something that proves with out a doubt its real. Not some silly flawed test they run on it
every year to line the pockets of who ever owns it.. Ok im bein silly. I hope its real, i hope that im looking at the face of christ.

Originally posted by wirefly
Wouldn't a secular scientist in these modern times be more inclined to try to DISprove the shroud just as a Catholic scientist would be inclined to
PROVE the shroud to be legit?

Provided they are both scientists and now scoundrels, it doesn't matter whether the reasearcher is an atheist or a Catholic. You see, if you don't
fudge the data, if you don't obfuscate the theories, if you publish it in refereed journals, it's all good.

There is only one scientific method, and if a religious person decides to eschew it, they quit been scientists the same second. Same applies to
atheists.

The shroud appears to be a man in his 50's, not 33.
It is my opinion, That the Man on the Shroud is not Jesus Christ.
The younger mans Cheek bones do not protrude, and Eyes are not that deep in the skull.

No way is it a medieval hoax they didn't even have the technology to make such a thing back then.

I think you'd be surprised by the tricks real Alchemists had up their voluminous sleeves, back in the day.

Did you read the article? Scientists have proven that there is no way that could of created this in medieval times. Some how I don't think even the
best Alchemists had high-intensity ultra violet lasers back in those days.

edit on 22-12-2011 by RevelationGeneration because: (no reason
given)

You wouldn't think they would have cameras either, but the fact remains that they did.

I read a book when I was younger based on the theory that the shroud was actually created by one of the most brilliant minds of history-- Leonardo Da
Vinci. This book goes on to claim that he accomplished this using a technique related to the "camera obscura."

In the movie The Passion there is a woman who takes her shawl and gives it to Yeshuah. He wipes His face with it.
I like that version because it is plausable. We will never know the origin of the turin shroud............we will continue to postulate theories
without ever truly knowing.

I really think it doesn't matter as it's just another unsolved mystery. The truth is we are called to have faith without proof.

Why do you people always have to shout "ET" when you find something that cannot be explained by normal human measure?

LOLOLOL For the same reason billions have to shout "GOD" when something cannot be explained by normal human measure?

Also, we have ONE shroud. How many millions of people were buried in a shroud back then? I don't know about anyone else, but if Jesus died at the age
of 33, did people actually look 70 at that age back then? The image on the shroud sure looks that old.

Originally posted by matadoor
Oh, and to Revelation Generation, I leave you this little reminder....

Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge,
practice the very same things" (Romans 2:1).

Thank you, RG has been doing more than his fair share of judging people and telling them where they will go for some time now, hasn't he?
I gave you a star, and you deserve it too.

As for the shroud, I don't think it was ever "supernatural," in that sense of the word, and could have in fact have been produced by ET Technology, it
could also have been the burial shroud of Jacques de Molay.(1292-1314)

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.